Kerry in 2004. Dean in 2008?

[Cascadian]

I once again will be voting for Kerry only to get Bush out of office but I get a strange feeling things won't change too much. Maybe the economy will bounce back and all but what about the "war" on terrorism and Iraq? I do not think I could see myself voting for Kerry again in 2008 should he win in November this year. I would definately hope Howard Dean will try again and restart his presidential bid in 2008. I would definately support him again. I may even back a third party candidate if Kerry goes "Republican Lite" on us in 2008.


John

[lyrical di]

1. keeping the faith

Kerry in 2004 and 2008. Edwards as his running mate and Edwards in 2012. Gotta believe they can turn it around.

[Null Pointer]

3. Declining re-election

I don't think Kerry, should he win, would decline the Democratic nomination in 2008. But it made me think: when was the last time an incumbent President declined to run for his second term? What were the circumstances? How many times has it happened?

[dammit905]

8. I believe it was LBJ?

If I remember correctly, Robert Kennedy was so much more popular than LBJ that he declined the nomination. Then, of course, Kennedy was assassinated and Nixon won.

[lyrical di]

23. checking

Kennedy wasn't an official candidate when LBJ bowed out. Johnson left the race because of McCarthy's strong showing. It can be speculated that RFK would have entered in any case but he hadn't done so when LBJ announced he would not seek, nor would he accept his party's nomination for president.

[onehandle]

9. President Johnson.

Payment for Vietnam. That in turn got Bobby Kennedy killed and gave us Nixon.

No f*cking way will I allow Kerry to only serve one term.

[Kazak]

4. Yeah...

If we lose all the resolve that we've managed to gain in hopes of ousting Bush*, we'll only find ourselves right back in the same boat. Though, I must admit I do share some of the same hesitations about Kerry as the original poster. Fingers crossed...we'll see.

[Paragon]

2. Jesus.

I voted for Dean, too - but let it go.

[Bill McBlueState]

15. exactly

Dean understands the importance of party unity. Why can't all of his supporters?

[hippiechick]

17. .

:eyes:


:hippie:

[bigwillq]

5. We need to support Kerry for two terms and then

his running mate for two terms. As much as I love Dean I don't know what will be different if he ran again for president. I still do n't think he would have national appeal. I do love him though in his new role as a Democratic and Kerry public informer!

[Dookus]

6. yes

because the only thing better than a small-state Governor is one who's been out of office for years :eyes:

[LoZoccolo]

7. And this whole thing is about what?

Even if your post is going to center around your opinion, you should at least tell us why it should be important to us as well.

(P.S. I don't hold on to my Dean avatar as a way of not getting behind Kerry...I haven't gotten around to changing it plus I want people to know that a Dean supporter can easily support Kerry.)

[onehandle]

10. How unrealistic.

I suspect you'll be unhappy with Kerry no matter what.

[Cascadian]

14. I am not going to go in lock step with those who support Kerry.

I will vote just to get Bush out of office. I will admit that Kerry will be a slight improvement from Bush but still, I am very wary of what Kerry is going to do. I do not want a Republican Lite or PNAC Lite candidate. I will stick with my opinions. That's it.


John

[Old and In the Way]

22. Nor are you going to give us any solid basis for your argument.

I'm sorry your candidate was not accepted by voting Democrats. But this happens every primary season.

And, if Kerry does what I believe he will do and is capable of doing, everyone will be saying "Dean, who?" in 2008.

[Cascadian]

26. My basis is this.

We will all vote for Kerry in Nov., but is he going to work for OUR best interests and stick to the Democratic Party princples are is he going to flip flop and go Republican Lite? If he does the same old status quo business as usual then I will not support him the next time around. I voted for Nader in 96 not Clinton. Mine was a protest vote towards Clinton's policies in globalization, three strikes you're out and don't ask don't tell.

I just get the feeling Kerry is going to disappoint a lot of people in his first four years. I hope I am wrong but let's not follow blindly. Vote for Kerry? Yes but just keep your mind open. Don't follow like sheep.

John

[Old and In the Way]

28. I'm sure you do hope he'll disappoint.

The fact that you chose Nader over Clinton in 96 is rather humorous. Clinton's economic record was outstanding and his globalization policies made him a vertible hero in the eyes of the world.

Interesting that the anti-NAFTA/anti-globalization rhetoric has come on Bush's watch. The policies were extremely successful in the 90's. 24MM more American jobs were created. 100's of millions of people in 3rd world countries saw their lot improved, too.

Sounds like you are blaming Clinton for Bush's domestic fiscal policy failures.

[Cascadian]

30. I am not blaming Clinton

He had his good points but I am not going to follow (I repeat) FOLLOW in lock step with those who think it's okay to be Republican Lite. Clinton had his faults and I am not talking about a White House intern either. Bush is definately worse though.

Just because Kerry could win does not mean he is not going to get a free ride from me. One must be objectionable to the leaders no matter what their politics are. That is called Democracy. You should try it sometime. I would even criticize Dean if he had some questionable polcies too.


John

[Old and In the Way]

43. Glad you see the difference between Clinton and Bush.

I wouldn't want to think you were OD'ing on the Nader Kool-Aid. Kerry's career in the Senate is one of a strong liberal/progressive record. Kerry will be the most progressive Democratic nominee running for President in my lifetime, at least since George McGovern (whom I canvassed for in 72). So when you say Republican-lite, excuse me while I chuckle because it sounds like we'd have to elect Chairman Mao to get far enough Left to please you. :-)

[Cascadian]

54. Not to elect chairman Mao

I was thinking more of a president that would be like a Pierre Trudeau, Nelson Mandela, or a Olof Palme. Not a Communist.


John

[Old and In the Way]

60. I'd like to vote for Thomas Jefferson, too.

True, he'd never make it to office today, with his slave ownership problem, but he'd make a great President! I like these pretend exercises, too.

[Kahuna]

11. Oh brother!

Words escape me.

[Classical_Liberal]

12. I have to drunk on election day, but primary challenges never

work at the Presidential level, and the republican party will still be dominated by the same fundy/neocon axis in 2004.

The country wasn't set up for third parties.

I will put my hopes in the House and Senate campaigns.

[Kazak]

13. It'd be nice if Dems could retain the WH indefinitely...

We need to do more than just roll back the Republican party...we need to eliminate it.

;)

[NightOwwl]

50. Can I quote you please?

Great comment pengpong. Turnabout is fair play!

[Kazak]

62. Most certainly.

Have at it. :D

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Alenne]

16. How do you know Dean would be better?

[Classical_Liberal]

18. Dean says he would vote against IWR

and we take his word for it. It's all you can do with any politician. He was also not nearly as corrupted by corporate Cash, which means he would probably get more done.

[Alenne]

20. You are hoping a politician is telling the truth

and not just telling you what you want to hear. It is easy for him to say he wouldn't vote for something he didn't have the ability to vote for.

I guess your answer is you don't know.

[Classical_Liberal]

21. So is Kerry not a politician?

? Do you see where you lesser evil rhetoric takes us. You need to do something other than trash other peoples candidates.

[Alenne]

25. Kerry is definitely a politician.

I didn't trash anyone's candidate and I would think that someone who spends a lot of time "trashing" Kerry would be able to handle my simple comment about Dean.

I have no lesser evil rhetoric. I am just not convinced that Dean is that different from other politicians that he would change things significantly.

[Classical_Liberal]

29. I am mad him right now.

I have a right to be. I'll vote for him, only because he ain't Bush but his behavior isn't promising a big change.

[Old and In the Way]

27. Please, spare me the baloney.... Dean isn't a politician?

He's made plenty of compromises while Governor. He made deals with corporations. I happen to like Howard and donated to his campaign last summer. But please don't try to tell me the guy is a saint. He is a very good politician...just like Kerry. And there is nothing dishonorable with the profession.

[Classical_Liberal]

31. Alenne is the one who said I can't trust Dean cause he is

a politician. So I asked if Kerry wasn't a politician too. REad the thread. I can see I am being stalked now. I am fucking pissed about the PNAC person in his campaign. flaming me won't change it.

[Old and In the Way]

44. Stalk you? Don't flatter yourself.

But I do respond to posts where people mischaracterize people's positions. Like you just did here with your inference that Kerry is a PNACer. You have not one scintilla of proof to make that smear...so please provide proof or retract.

[Classical_Liberal]

55. Will Marshall is his speech writer

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1379818&mesg_id=1379818

Will Marshall is a signatory of PNAC documents supporting pre-emptive strikes on Iraq.

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=10&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=Will+Marshall+&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=www.newamericancentury.org&safe=images

[Old and In the Way]

59. Yes, thanks for pointing that out.

Based on that, I assure you I will not vote for Mr. Marshall for President.

[Classical_Liberal]

65. Aren't you pissed that Kerry would hire(reward) this man?

?

I am.

Anyone that is that big of a fuckup and with so much blood on his hands shouldn't be working anymore in the foreign policy field.

[Old and In the Way]

67. Of course not.

Kerry is smart to get a PNACer onboard, if for no other reason than to understand what these neocons are thinking. I realy haven't read up on Marshall, but could he have changed his mind in 6 years, now that he has seen the folly of the plan? Perhaps. In that case, he'll add credibility as an insider when the PNACacle players are discredited.

A wise President gets counsel from a variety of viewpoints. Perhaps if Bush had exposure to the progressive viewpoints of reality (and read a few papers), he might not be going down as the dumbest pResident of all time.

[Old and In the Way]

24. I hope you aren't inferring that Kerry is corrupted by corporate cash.

His record on campaign contributions is quite remarkable. And he has made it clear that getting companies who set up off-shore dummy corporations to avoid paying taxes will be a centerpiece of his tax policy.

[Classical_Liberal]

32. Dean's campaign took less money from them

so I preferred him. Nothin you can do about it. I am mostly pissed about his pnac friend Will Marshall because I fucking want out of the war. I think people like Marshall and his fellow PNACers have no place in politics. Nitpicking me won't change change that opinion. Picking on Dean won't change it. Hint: Dean isn't in the race anymore. If Kerry wants me to like him he needs to work harder at it.

[Old and In the Way]

45. Sorry, I told you that I supported Dean last summer. I had absolutely

no problems with Dean. But Dean couldn't cut the mustard with the Democratic primary voters.

Not sure about Marshall's PNAC credentials (I guess that was who you were refering to in the above thread, so my bad if I misread your post). But I'm not voting for Marshall, I'm voting for Kerry. I'm actually glad that Kerry's getting advice from all camps. Rand Beers worked for Bush, too. Is that a bad thing? Not at all...John will get important insight on the country's intel over the past 3 years.

Unlike Dimson and the groupthinkers in power today, Kerry will be like Clinton ...taking counsel from all sides. Worse thing a President can do is become a rigid ideologue. That's what gets us in trouble, like what George is beginning to learn now.

[Classical_Liberal]

56. Bush isn't an ideologue. He has no ideas

The neocons are ideologues. I said I would grudgingly vote for the guy. It will remain grudging until I am confident their is no pnac agenda there, which will probably require dissassocition from them. I actually think fuckups like that should be fired and their careers should end. I don't understand why that doesn't happen anymore,

[Old and In the Way]

61. Because Bush is an ideologue.

Ideologues value people who reinforce their views. Problem is, there aren't enough qualified ideologues for Bush to choose from, so he can't afford to fire the ones he's got.

[Classical_Liberal]

66. Why did Kerry hire Marshall?

?

[Old and In the Way]

68. I haven't asked JK, but see 67

Perhaps you should write a letter to the campaign and get to the bottom of this. I don't want to see you losing sleep over this very important issue. :-D

[JI7]

19. will Dean's sealed records be open by then ?

?

[madmax23]

33. 2008 election will be...

Hillary vs. Condi

[slinkerwink]

35. His records were already ruled to be opened after he dropped out

[Dookus]

36. I never heard any such thing...

do you have a link?

[madfloridian]

39. He did not fight the lawsuit, but the state did.

Links are all over. It is state decision, not the governor's.

[Dookus]

41. So the records are NOT

unsealed. That's what I thought.

[slinkerwink]

46. they are unsealed....

:eyes:

[Dookus]

47. And I already asked you for any link to that information

because I never heard it anywhere.

I believe you're mistaken.

[slinkerwink]

48. here's a link

http://www.mikehersh.com/Dean_s_Secret_Records.shtml

Judge rules on Dean's gubernatorial records
A Vermont court has denied the right-wing group Judicial Watch a victory in the lawsuit over Dean's gubernatorial records. I wouldn't call it a victory for Dean, though, as he's been ordered to provide a detailed index of the records as well as an explanation of why each record should remain sealed. It seems to me the burden of proof has now been placed squarely on Dean. There are 145 sealed boxes that now must be catalogued, while 190 boxes have already been released to the public.

It seems that the records weren't opened after all, but I'd look at the top link if I were you to fully understands how the records controversy was vastly overblown.

[Dookus]

49. LOL

so I was right. The records are still sealed. That's all I was saying.

And you do know, that he COULD have chosen to unseal them himself at any time.

And next time, before you roll your eyes at me for asking a simple question, make sure you're not totally wrong about the answer.

[slinkerwink]

52. Dean couldn't do that because he no longer was the governor

and those records were the property of the state.

[Dookus]

57. Again,

I believe you are mistaken. Dean could unseal the records any time he wants.

On edit: I just checked. You ARE mistaken, again. The records are not sealed by law - they're sealed under a "Memorandum of Understanding" between Dean and the Vermont Secretary of State, under an Executive Privilege claim. Dean can waive that privilege at any time.

[Dookus]

63. You are mistaken

PLEASE look this stuff up before you make blanket assertions. You were wrong about them being unsealed, and you're wrong about the former Governor's ability to unseal them.

[sadiesworld]

53. ROFLMAO

[mot78]

34. This thread does nothing other than rip off scabs

Give Kerry a chance if he gets elected. And if he can't deliver all of his promises, chances are DeLay and Frist would be the ones holdings them up anyway. And unless something REALLY bad happens to Kerry in 2007-2008, I seriously doubt Kerry will have any serious primary challengers...unless you drink the LaRouche Kool-Aid.

[Dookus]

37. But they don't WANT to give him a chance...

any compromise he makes because he HAS to due to a Republican congress will be proof that he's a closet conservative PNAC'er baby-eating corporatist.

And of course, Dean would NEVER have to compromise on ANYTHING.

It's a twisted world-view.

[scottxyz]

38. Can I nominate Dean for Surgeon General?

Could we have Dean implement health insurance for the whole country?

Who the heck is the Surgeon General these days anyways? Last ones I remember were C. Everett Koop and Antonia Novello.

Seems the only General we hear about these days is the Attorney General, protecting us against pornographers while he coddles the terrorists.


= =

Just googled up
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/flash.htm

(really lame website with a FLASH intro... Ugh! But you can skip it.)

"Vice Admiral Richard H. Carmona, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.C.S., was sworn in as Surgeon General on August 5, 2002."

Who's he?

[Dookus]

58. Surgeon-General

is a menial, trivial position. It would be an insult to even offer it to Dean.

[fujiyama]

40. Well I'm glad

your going to vote for him this time to get Bush out of power (that is absolutely necessary).

However, Kerry hasn't won yet. He hasn't been president yet. We don't know how he will govern. He could end up governing much more to the left of how he campaigns. If his record is any indication, he will govern to the left of Bill Clinton.

Give him a chance first. If he enacts Bush lite policies (I personally find it highly unlikely), then express your outrage then. You have the right to be skeptical, but this thread makes little sense considering if Kerry wins and barring an absolute mess of a first term (I'm talking serious scandals, wars, etc), he'll run for reelection unopposed and the party will support him 100%. A run by Dean against Kerry's reelection would tarnish his image a great deal.

That said, depending on how Kerry's VP does, Dean should definetely consider running again 2012. Even if he were to run in 2012, he wouldn't be too old. Depending on whether Kerry wins this election he should run again in 2008.

[Old and In the Way]

64. I believe that too.

"He could end up governing much more to the left of how he campaigns."

The GE is a fight for the middle. Bush certainly moderated (lied) his views/agenda to get elected. I would fully expect Kerry to do the same, from the other direction, to get elected.

Odd that some here will scream about Kerry's shading to the right, but you never hear them complaining about Bush's exposed RW agenda. Makes you wonder what their real intentions are....

[sampsonblk]

42. I Hope the Better Dems Run in 2008

This year, it seems the top Dems were afraid to run because Bush looked invincible. Hopefully in 2008, we wil get some better Dems in the primaries.

If not, I predict the Repubs will win in 2008. Without the ABB support he is enjoying now, what on earth will propel Kerry to a second term?

[fujiyama]

51. Second terms

are merely a referendum on the leadership of the president. Usually presidents are expected to be reelected unless they fuck up, the economy is sluggish, or there is some major foreign policy disaster.

BTW, who the hell are these so called "better dems" that didn't run? I'd say we had a fine list of candidates running and many of them had a good shot at capturing the nomination. Edwards, Clark, Dean, and Kerry all had a good shot of capturing the nomination. Ultimately the voters chose Kerry. The primaries are over. Kerry won.